r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 12,179
this is a what if post , a presumption how balance of power would have worked , had it existed . This thread was generally of the opinion that there was no such thing ; while the Wikipedia article nearly sounds like arcane knowledge or semi -religious documents where the people had to descend from saints or kings in the West and the family of the Prophet in the Islamic East , in order to justify their godgiven rights on any subject.
land was the arbiter of wealth , so it defined power , especially in the past . Many examples possible to the contrary , but even for the nomads , seemingly unattached to anywhere it was still the rule . Atilla's failure to defeat Rome has been described , ı believe , the amount of grasslands in Hungary , forage available setting a limit for the number of horses , since mobility , hence power of the Huns .
this is important stuff . There was a famous military historian , Keegan if ı remember the name correctly , that military styles differed widely and the eventual superiority of the West was inevitable . Descendants of heroic legends from the days of phalanxes and legions , West would fight to death , efficiently and with determination . West was manly , if you will . East , on the other hand , was fickle , it would avoid combat unless the odds were so undeniable in own favour that not fighting would have been sure proof of cowardice . ı don't remember whether he also mentioned the English were the big nomads of written history . No slurs to the British Tommy who has found himself in Thin Red Lines regularly far too many times .
the Brits have been blessed with their island , a productive enough real estate it put Britain far ahead , say , of Iceland . It has been already noted in these forums that it was not easy to invade the Isles . Especially in those millenia where strategic mobility was a handicap for everyone . Back in late 1600s , ı understand the French King decided to honour a city on "Metropolitan France " by a statue of himself , 30 years on it was still in transit by oxcart , halfway to final destination . Sea , on other hand was much easier . Ships moving by the wind hauling comparatively vast amounts of cargo with efficiency , but then there is always a catch ...
strategists will explain it with long obscure paragraphs . On how the English could mass from the sea onto enemy shores ; as land lines of communications were not as effective , it took time and effort for the enemies of the England to bring an equal or superior force to the chosen theater . And if things went bad , the Brits would go home . Things went bad twice for Napoleon , he went home and the enemies were in hot pursuit . Napoleon found himself on faraway islands twice . But nobody could follow defeated British troops home , not before beating the Royal Navy . The chosen weapon of a nation that was already a world power (of sorts at the time of decision) . Armada would have meant a victory for Spain and a scaffold for Elizabeth , but for the storms and those English ships . Civplayers would be instantly familiar with the style ; that sees no need for defenders while the production queues are full with buildings , wonders , wealth and offensive units .
could have been nice to discuss how RN "shaped" the notion of democracy or why the perfidious Albion could operate so effectively in destablizing its opponents but it would take pages . Suffice it to say Land was power and the Royal Navy was deterring , delaying and stopping acqusition of more land for Continental European countries who then had to fight , destructively , for the limited amounts of territory . The gap between the powers was always maintained if not widened as exemplified by the time RN was involved in that 45 minute war , where some African island Kingdom had to surrender or suffer the wrath of the gunboat diplomacy .
so far nothing on the balance of power ? . Had it existed , it would have been decided in an "informal" situation , say those clubs where people have always been accused of interference in politics . People who would also represent commercial interests . No written documents for public sight , since for European rulers it would have been so humiliating , to accept " the lead of a nation of shopkeepers" in return for the right to field an army of agreed numbers . Trade needs stability and peace , and choosing otherwise against the leading power of the planet brings much trouble and no profit (Napoleon who just needed the control of the Dover Strait for just 6 hours for the mastery of the world still fresh in memory )
and of course trade is dominated by the industrial revolution of the United Kingdom . American Civil War is regularly explained by the disagreements between the agrarian South who needed to export to UK , while industrially developed on a revolutionary scale North needed tariffs to protect own companies . Made it impossible for the plantation owners to set the tone if America's own expansion into West brought more North minded lawmakers in to the equation and , Kansas with massacres of the Whites by Whites was the match-stick that set the USA on fire . Maybe nothing in written history , but balances were much de rigour in those days , had a balance of power existed .
and it would be only rational for the British to stress the Balance of Power , as it was both a reason and result of the fact that they owned a quarter of the world . They had conciously chosen to be "the" naval power , limiting their army to have it acceptable to Europeans ; their "splendid isolation " was also likewise .
the next installment will examine how balance of power would have made the war inevitable , had it existed .
land was the arbiter of wealth , so it defined power , especially in the past . Many examples possible to the contrary , but even for the nomads , seemingly unattached to anywhere it was still the rule . Atilla's failure to defeat Rome has been described , ı believe , the amount of grasslands in Hungary , forage available setting a limit for the number of horses , since mobility , hence power of the Huns .
this is important stuff . There was a famous military historian , Keegan if ı remember the name correctly , that military styles differed widely and the eventual superiority of the West was inevitable . Descendants of heroic legends from the days of phalanxes and legions , West would fight to death , efficiently and with determination . West was manly , if you will . East , on the other hand , was fickle , it would avoid combat unless the odds were so undeniable in own favour that not fighting would have been sure proof of cowardice . ı don't remember whether he also mentioned the English were the big nomads of written history . No slurs to the British Tommy who has found himself in Thin Red Lines regularly far too many times .
the Brits have been blessed with their island , a productive enough real estate it put Britain far ahead , say , of Iceland . It has been already noted in these forums that it was not easy to invade the Isles . Especially in those millenia where strategic mobility was a handicap for everyone . Back in late 1600s , ı understand the French King decided to honour a city on "Metropolitan France " by a statue of himself , 30 years on it was still in transit by oxcart , halfway to final destination . Sea , on other hand was much easier . Ships moving by the wind hauling comparatively vast amounts of cargo with efficiency , but then there is always a catch ...
strategists will explain it with long obscure paragraphs . On how the English could mass from the sea onto enemy shores ; as land lines of communications were not as effective , it took time and effort for the enemies of the England to bring an equal or superior force to the chosen theater . And if things went bad , the Brits would go home . Things went bad twice for Napoleon , he went home and the enemies were in hot pursuit . Napoleon found himself on faraway islands twice . But nobody could follow defeated British troops home , not before beating the Royal Navy . The chosen weapon of a nation that was already a world power (of sorts at the time of decision) . Armada would have meant a victory for Spain and a scaffold for Elizabeth , but for the storms and those English ships . Civplayers would be instantly familiar with the style ; that sees no need for defenders while the production queues are full with buildings , wonders , wealth and offensive units .
could have been nice to discuss how RN "shaped" the notion of democracy or why the perfidious Albion could operate so effectively in destablizing its opponents but it would take pages . Suffice it to say Land was power and the Royal Navy was deterring , delaying and stopping acqusition of more land for Continental European countries who then had to fight , destructively , for the limited amounts of territory . The gap between the powers was always maintained if not widened as exemplified by the time RN was involved in that 45 minute war , where some African island Kingdom had to surrender or suffer the wrath of the gunboat diplomacy .
so far nothing on the balance of power ? . Had it existed , it would have been decided in an "informal" situation , say those clubs where people have always been accused of interference in politics . People who would also represent commercial interests . No written documents for public sight , since for European rulers it would have been so humiliating , to accept " the lead of a nation of shopkeepers" in return for the right to field an army of agreed numbers . Trade needs stability and peace , and choosing otherwise against the leading power of the planet brings much trouble and no profit (Napoleon who just needed the control of the Dover Strait for just 6 hours for the mastery of the world still fresh in memory )
and of course trade is dominated by the industrial revolution of the United Kingdom . American Civil War is regularly explained by the disagreements between the agrarian South who needed to export to UK , while industrially developed on a revolutionary scale North needed tariffs to protect own companies . Made it impossible for the plantation owners to set the tone if America's own expansion into West brought more North minded lawmakers in to the equation and , Kansas with massacres of the Whites by Whites was the match-stick that set the USA on fire . Maybe nothing in written history , but balances were much de rigour in those days , had a balance of power existed .
and it would be only rational for the British to stress the Balance of Power , as it was both a reason and result of the fact that they owned a quarter of the world . They had conciously chosen to be "the" naval power , limiting their army to have it acceptable to Europeans ; their "splendid isolation " was also likewise .
the next installment will examine how balance of power would have made the war inevitable , had it existed .
